WOODSTOCK, Ont. — A 17-year-old hockey player has been charged with assault causing bodily harm in connection with an on-ice incident during a game earlier this year in Woodstock, Ont., police said Wednesday.

Police say they received a criminal complaint on Jan. 14 alleging that a player was assaulted by another player during a hockey game in the city the previous day.

Video of the game was reviewed and witnesses interviewed, and police say the Crown attorney’s office was also consulted about whether charges could be laid “in the forum of a hockey game.”

“We are very well aware the subject of this investigation has garnered intense public attention across Canada and we respect there are passionate opinions on both sides of the physical aspect of hockey,” said Woodstock police Chief Rod Freeman.

“The decision to lay a criminal charge was not taken lightly and was based on an objective review of the evidence, including video evidence, and on factually based legal opinions from the Crown attorney’s office.”

The 17-year-old who is charged cannot be identified under provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

He’s to appear in court in Woodstock on July 11.

Like to hear some opinions. Two basic schools of thought here:

1. He instigated the events by being unsportsmanlike through snowing the goaltender of a losing team and proceeded to not defend himself. You can't poke the bear and then cry victim.

2. What lead to the altercation is irrelevant. The actions taken on by the opposing teams player have no place in or outside a rink. The assault was excessive and he should be charged accordingly.

"The leader must never close the gap between himself and the group. If he does, he is no longer what he must be. He must walk a tightrope between the consent he must win and the control he must exert."Vince Lombardi

When asked who won, Babcock said, “Well it doesn’t really matter as long as you don’t lose. It’s like going bear hunting, you take a slow guy with you in case the bear is hungry.”

Location:Cloudy Town, Minnesota. 762.20 miles from the Joe Louis Arena

Posted 26 June 2013 - 02:54 PM

You know, played a couple Canadian teams during summer hockey and this was very common the teams I played. I couldn't tell you how many times there were fights going on in the games, granted everyone still had there helmet on but Canadian teams would come to America tournaments and think they run s***.

I wonder if they would be filing this if their son didn't get his ass kicked. Can't really say I feel sorry for him, I know the other guy certainly went full retard, but still IDK i just can't get behind an assault charge being used in this case. Perhaps the roller hockey incident but not so much this.

I don't get why ANY parent would want their kids to have a successful career in hockey, yet think the sport was dangerously violent. Surely it's not for the money?

Also, why the hell did that guy not cover up when he was getting his ass kicked instead of kneeling upright like a human punching bag. What an odd story. The guy snow showers the hell out of the goalie and then just takes a beating. Odd.

Committing an unsportsmanlike penalty doesn't warrant what happened to that kid. He also didn't "not defend himself" he was never given any opportunity to.

Its not like the guy came up and challenged him to a fight, he threw a crosscheck to the side of the head of a defenceless player, then proceeded to give him a beating while he was already likely concussed. The guy was likely angry that his team was getting smoked and he was looking to exact some revenge from the first player who stepped out of line.

I think the charge was absolutely warranted and I don't think the league gave him even close to a sufficient punishment. That the Woodstock player was suspended at all is a joke, but I wouldn't be upset if the Brantford player was given a permanent ban from minor hockey.

Committing an unsportsmanlike penalty doesn't warrant what happened to that kid. He also didn't "not defend himself" he was never given any opportunity to.

Its not like the guy came up and challenged him to a fight, he threw a crosscheck to the side of the head of a defenceless player, then proceeded to give him a beating while he was already likely concussed. The guy was likely angry that his team was getting smoked and he was looking to exact some revenge from the first player who stepped out of line.

I think the charge was absolutely warranted and I don't think the league gave him even close to a sufficient punishment. That the Woodstock player was suspended at all is a joke, but I wouldn't be upset if the Brantford player was given a permanent ban from minor hockey.

There is no room in the game for that kind of cowardly garbage.

I have to disagree. When you go in and spray a goalie like that, you know what can happen. I used to do stuff like that all the time to get under the skin of the other team, but i never did it thinking nothing would ever happen.

I do think the player went too far, but if #11 doesn't spray the goalie it doesn't happen.

"The leader must never close the gap between himself and the group. If he does, he is no longer what he must be. He must walk a tightrope between the consent he must win and the control he must exert."Vince Lombardi

When asked who won, Babcock said, “Well it doesn’t really matter as long as you don’t lose. It’s like going bear hunting, you take a slow guy with you in case the bear is hungry.”

Its one thing to start a fight, but quite another to continue to pummel a guy who's clearly injured and struggling, especially over snowing the goalie. That goes against any hockey code or rule that's out there. It's the difference between a tough guy and a DB.

-The score was already a blowout at 7-2 making the snowing that much more of a rub

-The refs obviously did a horrendous job controlling the matter. As shown in the video they literally just stand there and watch until it's almost over.

-I'd like to state its much more "cowardly" to snow a goalie in a blowout win than to stick up for your goalie in that matter. Overboard? Hell yes but not cowardly.

School of thought #1 is utterly idiotic.

Committing an unsportsmanlike penalty doesn't warrant what happened to that kid. He also didn't "not defend himself" he was never given any opportunity to.

Its not like the guy came up and challenged him to a fight, he threw a crosscheck to the side of the head of a defenceless player, then proceeded to give him a beating while he was already likely concussed. The guy was likely angry that his team was getting smoked and he was looking to exact some revenge from the first player who stepped out of line.

I think the charge was absolutely warranted and I don't think the league gave him even close to a sufficient punishment. That the Woodstock player was suspended at all is a joke, but I wouldn't be upset if the Brantford player was given a permanent ban from minor hockey.

There is no room in the game for that kind of cowardly garbage.

He crosschecked the kid from behind and then proceeded to pummel a defenseless victim and went way overboard. The guy is a ****** and deserves to be punished.

Its one thing to start a fight, but quite another to continue to pummel a guy who's clearly injured and struggling, especially over snowing the goalie. That goes against any hockey code or rule that's out there. It's the difference between a tough guy and a DB.

He crosschecked the kid from behind and then proceeded to pummel a defenseless victim and went way overboard. The guy is a ****** and deserves to be punished.

I agree it was completely overboard. Way out of line. There's no condoning how far he took it.

However....what exactly did he think was going to happen? The game was already out of hand with previous fights/misconducts and a blowout score. To do what he did to the goalie and not expect some immediate repercussion is pretty naive.

All I'm saying is I believe he should take some responsibility for provoking the entire situation in an obviously out-of-hand game. That doesn't mean he deserves what he got or that the other player isn't entirely responsible for his own actions. Just show some acceptance that he knew exactly what he was doing (being classless and baiting the other team) and should have been more than aware that the other team would respond in a violent way.

If you're going to be a pest and do stupid things like that be aware of your surrounding and get your damn hands up.

"The leader must never close the gap between himself and the group. If he does, he is no longer what he must be. He must walk a tightrope between the consent he must win and the control he must exert."Vince Lombardi

When asked who won, Babcock said, “Well it doesn’t really matter as long as you don’t lose. It’s like going bear hunting, you take a slow guy with you in case the bear is hungry.”

1. He instigated the events by being unsportsmanlike through snowing the goaltender of a losing team and proceeded to not defend himself. You can't poke the bear and then cry victim.

While I agree that hockey is a violent sport, there is no logical, practical, or inherent connection between snow-showering a goalie and getting your face pounded in. Indeed, that seems like quite a bit of an overreaction.

I agree it was completely overboard. Way out of line. There's no condoning how far he took it.

However....what exactly did he think was going to happen? The game was already out of hand with previous fights/misconducts and a blowout score. To do what he did to the goalie and not expect some immediate repercussion is pretty naive.

Clearly he didn't expect to be crosschecked to the head and pummeled without mercy. If the culprit doesn't get convicted, he should certainly receive a very lengthy suspension---and perhaps mandatory anger management classes.

I have to disagree. When you go in and spray a goalie like that, you know what can happen. I used to do stuff like that all the time to get under the skin of the other team, but i never did it thinking nothing would ever happen.

I do think the player went too far, but if #11 doesn't spray the goalie it doesn't happen.

I'm sure he thought he might have to fight someone...not have a stick smashed into his head followed by several punches to his face when he's already down and defenceless.

Even the most hardcore fight lovers agree that once a guy is down you stop throwing...He was done after the cross check.

I also think that the offender would have just jumped someone else if it wasn't him...Brantford had already had several players tossed from the game for trying to start fights.

A few additional points:

-I'd like to state its much more "cowardly" to snow a goalie in a blowout win than to stick up for your goalie in that matter. Overboard? Hell yes but not cowardly.

If he wanted to stick up for his goalie then drop the gloves...cowardly is blindsiding a guy with a cross check to the head BEFORE dropping them.

I guess he didn't want to fight when the other guy had a chance to defend himself...it was a sucker punch with a stick.

Kid started it. Other kid took it WAY too far. Still don't think he should be criminally charged. Just banned from the league or something equally serious but not criminal.
I just think it's a slippery slope to press charges on a hockey fight.

Kid started it. Other kid took it WAY too far. Still don't think he should be criminally charged. Just banned from the league or something equally serious but not criminal.I just think it's a slippery slope to press charges on a hockey fight.

Kid started it. Other kid took it WAY too far. Still don't think he should be criminally charged. Just banned from the league or something equally serious but not criminal.I just think it's a slippery slope to press charges on a hockey fight.

I agree pressing charges for a hockey fight is a slippery sloap. But this wasnt a hockey fight. A hockey fight is two guys willingly squaring off and going at it and stopping if one is defenseless. This was one kid grabbing another kid off the ice who had no intention of fighting and just laying into him with sucker punches like a punk. The kid goes down and the punk continues to lay punches into him. That is not a fight. Its one kid throwing a hissy fit and assaulting another. So what that the kid sprayed the goalie. The goalie isnt going to die. It barely effects a goalie. Laying into a kid when hes not looking and while hes on the ice can cause serious harm though. There is to much of this junk in youth hockey. Its going to take a couple punks getting charged to stop it. I dont like the idea of it but if it cleans up youth hockey then Im all for it.

-I'd like to state its much more "cowardly" to snow a goalie in a blowout win than to stick up for your goalie in that matter. Overboard? Hell yes but not cowardly.

Sucker punching someone and then continuing while they are down and defenseless is the definition of cowardly.